About your Search

20130106
20130114
Search Results 0 to 25 of about 26 (some duplicates have been removed)
that there was and excuse the word legitimacy to this. i still don't feel that way. but at least i know to my great satisfaction that money didn't change hands. my family is thrilled and delighted. and based on my family's enthusiasm, then i can live with this. >> this includes harry. >> harry doesn't know, doesn't care. the idea of going to the white house, i think, will really get his attention. but the rest of the family couldn't be more thrilled. so to me that's reason enough. and couldn't be happier and more grateful to the folks who made this mistake. >> it's a really classy group to be associated with. as you mentioned, johnny carson. you were there for that. >> i was there for that night. and i remember i was to follow ted koppel and it was the first of pain times i had to follow ted koppel. and that's to the where you want to be. because he is very, very funny. and as i said that night, maybe a little too funny for a newsman. this was, gosh, 90-- i don't know, way, way back, a long time ago, '94, something like that. >> rose: one of your guests tonight is one of the funniest newsmen we've
to read the intentions of someone i don't know. it certainly was damaging because what it did was, what was a secure classified communication very candid assessment of the situation and recommendations ahead. it leaked that publicly before the president and his team and the president of defense had a time to digest it and therefore the decision-making process instead of being done in a calm way, had that sort of glare of publicity on it. >> rose: it looks like in some cases this was, although it had not, it was a general trying to influence the public debate in washington. >> it was not the case. >> rose: would you agree some people might have assumed that. >> i assumed some can. >> rose: it had poisoned the water between the general and the commander in chief. >> i don't think between myself and president obama. i think that there was less trust between department of defense, parts of it, and the new administration that i would have liked to see. i think it really went back to the very beginning from inauguration on. and i think that that trust is something that -- >> rose: from th
. this is something that don rumsfeld tried and failed to do. it's something that bob gates tried and failed to do in any serious way. and now, given the budget pressures, this is going to be the moment for performance. >> rose: a couple of points, i guess. rumsfeld would argue that we had a big war came along and bob gates would argue that in the end he did cut it somewhat. >> somewhat. but if you look at the total national security budget, charlie, which would be not just the pentagon but also the intelligence agencies, homeland security, it's basically doubled since the 9/11 attacks. >> rose: and weapons systems you don't really need in the judgment of many people other than those people who represent the districts where they're located. >> leftovers from the cold war and, remember, the president himself came in supported by chuck hagel on this point with the thought that there was a moment here to really build down on the nuclear force. and so far they have not been able to do that except some modest cuts when they passed the start treaty with russia early in the president's time. >> rose: tal
mean you moved out, so people don't live here anymore they are a little less close but not less close than that. >> maybe we need to work harder and make plans for just the two of us. >> well i was working and if i am not grumpy, i am writing and try calling you a lot last week. >> and i told you i have a third full-time job which is taking care of adam, i'm sorry. >> i am having a really hard time right now. >> i have no job, no boyfriend, i am starting to feel like i have no you. >> that is not true, okay? >> i am right here. >> okay. >> rose: the second season of girls begins this sunday, january 13, i am pleased to have lena dunham at the table for the first time, welcome. >> thank you so much for having me. it is very exciting, looking around at the studio, well, this is where the magic happens. >> rose: we hope. you create magic too, by the way. >> thank you so much. >> rose: how would you define what you do? >> i guess i would define what i do generally outside of girls as i write and direct film and television shows that that have strong female protagonists and are aimed at il
. but you guys don't believe that. >> no, that's not true. i think the president, you know, when i think about our first term in the two years that i was in the white house, i was the keeper of the polling data. i mean i'm out of the political realm and my job was to tell the president what public opinion was. he was rarely, you know, moved by it. but when we sat in a room and he was making a decision about the auto bailout, i said to him, you know mr. president, even in michigan people are opposed to this i wasn't really making a recommendation but he needed to know. and he said i under-- understand that but are we going let a million jobs go in the mith of this depression. he went out and made that case. the recovery act, you know, obviously on health care that was a very difficult fight so when i look at barack obama, i look at someone who was willing to make some very difficult decisions at a pivotal moment for our country. and spend his political capital to do that. >> rose: let me talk about 2008 and 2012. how are they different for you? >> uh-huh. well, 2008 was kind of once in a
t truth, it just elicits answers just to make the pain stop then you don't have to move on to the complicated moral arguments. you say fit doesn't work we can skip the moral argument. beyond that i think if you do move on to the moral argument, we can't set the bar as we have has a nation for generations to be the street cop on the world stage that enforces the standard for human rights that says to other governments you shall not torture, you shall not hld proners communicado. where does o moral high ground go when we engage in those same practices we ask others not to do because it's convenient or we consider it urgent. >> rose: move the movie argo tarring and directed by ben affleck is how the canadian ambassador somehow helped some americans during the time of the iranian hostage taking to survive and get out. we talked to the actual ambassador ken taylor the form canadian ambassador to iran. >> our thought was ys they were canadians, that was our fundamental starting point. we didn't quite care what they did in tehran. the movie team that we thought would work, ca
's more difficult when you are -- >> rose: you don't know -- >> right. it isn't as clear cut as that. that's why these instances are very rare. when we talk about the movie, zero dark 30 they present a very compelling moment where interrogators might well be justified in trying to coerce intelligence out of a captive. >> rose: john, in general. >> i think that's two key questions here. and one can sums out the other. let's be cold and clinical because the question has a bunch nuances and complications and opinions. start with the practice question. a, does it work. b, does it work better or faster or more accurately than conventional interrogation techniques. if the answer to question one is no it doesn't work any better or faster, or no it's not effect it was or doesn't elicit the truth, it just elicits answers just to make the pain stop then you don't have to move on to the complicated moral arguments. you can say fit doesn't work we can skip the moral argument. beyond that, i think if you do move on to the moral argument, we can't set the bar as we have as a nation for generation
Search Results 0 to 25 of about 26 (some duplicates have been removed)